Top 121 Quotes & Sayings by Richard N. Haass

Bad situations can always get worse.

September 11, 2001, was a terrible tragedy by any measure, but it was not a historical turning point. It did not herald a new era of international relations in which terrorists with a global agenda prevailed or in which such spectacular terrorist attacks became commonplace.

I am confident in saying that Oberlin did more for me than vice versa. I took a fantastic class in religion, which led me to archaeology, which got me to the Middle East, which led me to international relations, which launched me on my career.

The rise of populism is in part a response to stagnating incomes and job loss, owing mostly to new technologies but widely attributed to imports and immigrants.

The benefits of freer trade, such as job creation, lower inflation, and greater consumer choice, are often invisible or only partly visible.

Dissent is difficult. It can constitute a real dilemma for the person who disagrees.

If Trump, for whatever reason, continues to coddle Russia, then Congress, the media, foundations, and academics should publicly detail the corruption that characterizes Putin's rule.

I did not support the U.S. decision to intervene with military force in Libya. The evidence was not persuasive that a large-scale massacre or genocide was either likely or imminent. Policies other than military intervention were never given a full chance.

Security is the absolute precondition for sustainable recovery from conflict; without it, people cannot rebuild their country or return to school or work.

An open, market-oriented, and peaceful Iraq could also advance reform and growth across the entire region.

The United States is not just another country. It has more capacity and potential to influence the world than any other country - and no other country has the resources and mindset to lead a world that is not on autopilot.

In a global world, what happens within one country can all too easily affect others.

Paradigm shifts, particularly in diplomacy and security issues, are, by definition, major undertakings.

It is neither feasible nor desirable for Europe to establish itself as a geopolitical equal or competitor of the U.S.

It is difficult to think of a foreign policy issue that preoccupies and polarizes world opinion as much as the Palestinian question.

Homegrown terrorists are a real problem for even the most modern, democratic societies.

Americans never would alter the way entitlement programs are funded or education administered without serious study and widespread debate.

Not every threat to America's national interests can be addressed with military power.

A China that trades extensively with the U.S. and its Asian neighbors will think twice before it pursues any policy that would place those relationships at risk. Likewise, trade between India and Pakistan could contribute to the normalization of ties between these long-estranged neighbors.

Speaking truth to power is actually a form of loyalty.

It is true that the U.S. could and should have been more generous as Russia made its painful transition to a market economy in the 1990s.

No one pursuing reasonable goals and who is prepared to compromise can argue that terrorism is his or his group's only option.

It is important to signal that opposition to the use of any weapon of mass destruction is both deep and broad.

Difficult choices, unlike red wine, rarely improve with age.

What countries must do to join the World Trade Organization is precisely what they must do to become productive and democratic: accept the rule of law, reduce corruption, and become open, accountable, and transparent.

Diplomacy can and will matter; little is inevitable in international relations.

Indeed, the big U.S. error after 9/11 was to treat Pakistan as if it were an ally. With an ally, it is possible to assume a large degree of policy overlap. With Pakistan, no such assumption can be made.

Success in foreign policy, as in carpentry, requires the right tools for the job.

Generically, wars in necessity are wars where, I think, the vital interest of the nation are at stake, in which there are no viable alternatives to the use of force.

Weapons of mass destruction - nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons - are just that, and no cause can excuse their use.

To be sure, many of the Sykes-Picot borders reflected deals cut in Europe rather than local demographic or historical realities. But that hardly makes the Middle East unique: Most borders around the world owe their legacy less to thoughtful design or popular choice than to some mixture of violence, ambition, geography, and chance.

The abolition of the presidential term limit and President Xi Jinping's concentration of power have come as an unwelcome surprise to many.

Indeed, in foreign policymaking, inconsistency is often a virtue. I speak not of principles but of policy.

The United States, working closely with the United Kingdom and others, established the liberal world order in the wake of World War II. The goal was to ensure that the conditions that had led to two world wars in 30 years would never again arise.

The U.S. does not want to live under the shadow of a North Korea that possesses long-range missiles capable of delivering nuclear payloads to American cities. At the same time, the U.S. has no appetite for a war that would prove costly by every measure.

Trade is the all-but-forgotten weapon in the battle against poverty, but it can provide more help to the poor than aid can.

American presidents get to make lots of choices, with one critical exception: what awaits them in the in-box on top of the desk in the Oval Office.

It is in the interest of Americans to find out what those wanting to be president think about a wide range of challenges and what they might do about them. We should want to get their take on the wisdom of past decisions, what they agree and disagree with, and why.

History shows that societies where opportunity is safeguarded tend to be societies that are good international citizens.

In a world in which the United States does less, whatever set of calculations, other countries will tend to calculate - to move in one of two ways. Either they will assuage or, to use a more loaded term, appease the strongest power in the neighborhood with all the consequences of that, or they will determine to take matters into their own hands.

We all have some basic obligation to one another.

Modern terrorism is too destructive to be tolerated, much less supported.

Russian membership in the World Trade Organization has the potential to strengthen the rule of law, combat corruption, and give Russia a stake in better relations with the outside world.

Wars of necessity are essentially unavoidable. They involve the most important national interests, a lack of promising alternatives to the use of force, and a certain and considerable price to be paid if the status quo is allowed to stand. Examples include World War II and the Korean War.

I believe in diplomacy; I don't believe in talking to... that talking to Iran somehow constitutes a concession or a favour.

Democracy requires an informed citizenry able to question its government.

The vote in the United Kingdom in favor of leaving the E.U. attested to the loss of elite influence.

America's armed forces are an essential background to much of what the U.S. accomplishes internationally.

Unrestrained zeal to make the world better could make it worse. Promoting democracy must be undertaken with humility, care, and wisdom.

There is a clear norm against the spread of nuclear weapons, but there is no consensus or treaty on what, if anything, is to be done once a country develops or acquires nuclear weapons.

No country can succeed if it denies itself the talents of half of its people.

If old American alliance commitments don't count for as much, countries will, in some cases, then say, 'Well, we've got to militarize in certain ways and act more independently.'

Russia may well be willing to stop interfering in Eastern Ukraine in exchange for a degree of sanctions relief if it could be assured that ethnic Russians there would not face reprisals.

Trump's foreign policy is not so much immoral as it is amoral.

Americans, for their part, must accept that a strong Europe will not be content to simply do America's bidding.

Nationalism is a tool increasingly used by leaders to bolster their authority, especially amid difficult economic and political conditions.

Americans were happy to buy vast quantities of relatively inexpensive Chinese manufactured goods, demand for which provided jobs for the tens of millions of Chinese who moved from poor agricultural areas to new or rapidly expanding cities.

Europeans must shed their illusions about what they can accomplish in the world on their own. Loose talk about resurrecting a multi-polar world is just that - loose talk.

Middle East history is replete with examples of missed and lost chances to make peace.

For too long, America tolerated a 'democratic exception' in the Muslim Middle East. As long as governments were friendly and backed regional stability, there was no need for outsiders to encourage representative government.